Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: sitetest; delacoert; ArrogantBustard; Candor; Monkey Face; Leo Farnsworth; muawiyah; allmost; ...
ALL: Now get this: An Alaska Lds branch president who has some oversight of Lds missionaries who sporadically come to his neck of the woods emphasized several weeks ago "that they have NO INTEREST in proselytizing to members of other churches in town." [BTW, the excerpt is cited below if you want to see source and a bit more context]

Any of you ex-Mormons or ex-Mormon missionaries want to weigh in on that? No interest? Zilch? Zippo?

Key Q: Without any of us being on the "inside" to actually judge whether this Lds branch prez is telling the truth -- like the ex-Missionary who wrote the article that was behind this thread -- Does this comment pass the straight-face test?

And of course, the context for all of this is that this thread is about an ex-Lds missionary who said one of the lies he told to prospects was "We're not trying to convert you".

And sitetest is defending these statements as not lies.

Fact: Most churches prefer to use words like evangelism, sharing the good news, witnessing, outreach, and the like. The Mormon church? Why they make no bones calling what they do with their 50,000+ missionaries as proselytization. Other churches might shy away from that term. Mormons don't.

It's then in that context we review this other article with the statement below by an Lds branch president:

"Don Clark is the branch president...And who are the missionaries and what do they do, exactly? They're often men or women in their early twenties who spend two years in the service of the church and travel to different communities. But they can also be older members of the Church. Clark says that their work primarily involves working the community's LDS church and emphasizes that they have NO INTEREST in proselytizing to members of other churches in town. He also says that community service is a major component of what they do." Source: KUCB, Unalaska, Alaska, Sept. 16, 2010 see Missionaries depart from Unalaska LDS church

Note for the uninitiated: Mr. Clark says that "community service is a major component of what they [lds missionaries] do."

Knowing the Lds missionary rules, can I say that's a "lie"? Well, based on context, no. Mr. Clark has told the truth as it goes with "context" -- because Mr. Clark also said "they can be older members of the church" -- and frequently, all older member-missionaries of the church do is indeed community service projects.

But the younger missionaries? Are "community service" projects a "major part" of what they do?

The answer? No. Missionary rules limit them to four hours of community service per week. And it doesn't have to be four hours. It could be one hour.

Now we don't have an interview transcript...but we can raise the Q:

Based upon how Lds commonly uses its missionaries, is this branch president, although telling the truth in context about older member-missionaries, misleading people to think...
...that the younger missionaries have absolutely "NO interest" in proselytizing other members...
...that they are there to ONLY focus on the Lds church itself and offer a "major component" of 1-4 hours per week toward community service...
...knowing that Lds missionaries are not overly involved in overseeing any local church programs or initiatives?

I mean, c'mon. Say you're an Lds branch president. You've been told things by your "prophets" through the years that "every member is a missionary." And you are not only caught saying but actually emphasizing to a local journalist that they have NO INTEREST in proselytizing to members of other churches in town?

BTW, several reasons exist why Lds missionaries are not overtly involved in overseeing local lds activities/programs...I'll do a brief post on that 'cause somebody's bound to bring it up.

185 posted on 11/10/2010 9:17:58 AM PST by Colofornian ("So how do LDS deal with the [Adam-God] phenomenon? WE DON'T; WE SIMPLY SET IT ASIDE" - BYU prof)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]


To: All
In light of the previous post, I'm sure somebody's going to bring up local Lds church activities that missionaries are involved in...and yes, they are indeed involved...but you need to understand:
1. Unalaska, Alaska can't even count on getting missionaries every year;
2. Lds missionaries are frequently transferred from one place to another in the middle of their 2-year mission [#1 & #2 together shows no continuity in Lds missionaries being able to oversee anything];
and 3. Per missionary rules, Lds missionaries cannot overbook even their community service at night & weekends because it says that is prime proselytizing time...and one weekday is devoted to "prep time" -- so it's not like they are even encouraged to oversee youth activities or the like as Lds inc. doesn't want any romantic entanglements with local teens.
187 posted on 11/10/2010 9:20:52 AM PST by Colofornian ("So how do LDS deal with the [Adam-God] phenomenon? WE DON'T; WE SIMPLY SET IT ASIDE" - BYU prof)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian

After a while, I just get tired of beating my head against the wall on this and choose to “shake the dust off my feet” and go on to the “next village”.


189 posted on 11/10/2010 9:28:37 AM PST by RobRoy (The US Today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
Note for the uninitiated: Mr. Clark says that "community service is a major component of what they [lds missionaries] do."

Don't overlook that the "community service" by the missionaries leads to contacts for proslytizing...and buffing up the image of the church. I've personally seen this. There's ALWAYS an agenda with the "community outreach" by the mormon church.

Can anyone point me to "community service for ALL/NO faiths" such as inner city food banks, homeless shelters, clothing drives for indigents, etc. by the mormon church?

The much-vaunted "welfare plan" is for members..after they sign up for the gubbmint welfare, that is.

191 posted on 11/10/2010 9:37:47 AM PST by greyfoxx39 (I love Karma. Loser dem house staffers lose insurance, have to go on ObamaCare. ;o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
Dear Colofornian,

As a Catholic, I may have a different perception of this than you have.

For us, “proselytize” can be a pejorative term. In Russia, some time after the fall of communism, we established diocesan structures for our Church, and for this and other “offenses” we have been accused of “proselytization.” We admit that we're happy if someone comes to Catholic faith in Russia, and enters into our communion, but we don't think that what we're doing is nefarious, and as the connotation of “proselytization” is that it is nefarious, we reject the label out of hand.

Yet, there are Orthodox Christians, including perhaps folks here at FR who DO think that our actions are nefarious, and thus accuse us thusly.

Are we happy to gain converts and others who wish to come into full communion with our Church? Certainly. But we don't think that what we're doing is evil, we don't think that we're using evil means, and thus, we reject that label.

I kinda doubt that most Mormons think that they're doing something evil in trying to share their faith and bring others to it. So, they might reject terms that label their actions as nefarious.

You may disagree with them. And, it may be that you're objectively correct, and their methods ARE nefarious.

Yet, they may not be persuaded of that.

I will say that my own experience with LDS missionaries is that they've always been:

- polite;
- upfront;
- willing to stand and own their own beliefs when I name them.

As well, without exception, I've never worked or done business with a Mormon who hasn't been:

- hardworking;
- scrupulously honest in all work and business dealings;
- fair;
- reliable.

The experience of others may differ, but there it is.

So, having experienced real decency in my own personal dealings with members of the LDS religion, it's a tough sell to me to say that they're all liars when it comes to religion.

They all believe a REALLY WHACKY RELIGION that has always made me laugh (I visited my first LDS stakehouse when I was perhaps around 10 years old, with my father. We laughed all the way home. I've actually been to Salt Lake City, looked at the presentations the Mormons make of themselves to us non-Mormons. I used to actually know a fair bit about the religion.). I don't take seriously the claims of Joseph Smith. I don't actually believe that he had special specs to read gold plates or tablets or whatever. I don't actually believe that Jesus was in North America, or that there were ancient Hebrew tribes here in North America, or that God was once a man like us and through dint of hard work & superior efforts got to be God, I don't believe that the LDS religion is even monotheistic, no less Christian, I don't believe that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, etc., etc., etc.

But heck, I don't believe in the Lord Krishna, either, but I've known, met, and loved any number of Hindus. And I don't call them liars because they actually DO believe in the Lord Krishna.


sitetest

198 posted on 11/10/2010 10:11:37 AM PST by sitetest ( If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson